Difference between revisions of "Vehicle emission reduction equipment requirements"

From Policy Atlas
Jump to: navigation, search
(Design)
(Design)
Line 46: Line 46:
  
 
Assuming that a jurisdiction has decided to adopt the policy, the following questions will need to be answered when determining ''how'' to implement this policy:
 
Assuming that a jurisdiction has decided to adopt the policy, the following questions will need to be answered when determining ''how'' to implement this policy:
# '''Click "edit" to add questions that help inform how to implement the policy.'''
 
##Add additional guidance to help policymakers answer each design question.
 
 
# What are the main targets of the emission reduction equipment requirements?
 
# What are the main targets of the emission reduction equipment requirements?
 
## Specific targets of the requirements would be large construction sites as well as any non-road motor vehicles such as trucks.  
 
## Specific targets of the requirements would be large construction sites as well as any non-road motor vehicles such as trucks.  
 +
# Is the cost of emission reduction equipment worth the benefits?
 +
## The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 have set out stricter standards for the improvement of air quality. Since the reforms, SO2 emissions have fallen by about 70% and lead has fallen by 99%. This has had significant impacts on human health. Studies predict that by 2020, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments will have saved 4.2 million lives and have saved $2 trillion in economic benefits.
 
#
 
#
 
<!--Describe key questions that must be considered in establishing the scope, depth, or eligibility of the policy. For example, "What will be a maximum income level for beneficiaries of this policy?" Each Design section should also provide general advice to help answer each question.
 
<!--Describe key questions that must be considered in establishing the scope, depth, or eligibility of the policy. For example, "What will be a maximum income level for beneficiaries of this policy?" Each Design section should also provide general advice to help answer each question.

Revision as of 13:54, 24 October 2016

Emission reduction equipment requirements are in place to reduce the volatile substances which enter the atmosphere especially through fossil fuel sources. Common substances which are detrimental to air quality include SO2, NOx, ozone, and particulate matter. Additionally, off-road vehicles such as those used for agriculture and construction, are liable to the Tier 4 emission standard set by the Environmental Protection Agency to have been reached by 2015.


CONCEPT


Concept.png

Goals
Conceptual Example

Local city roads are undergoing multiple road reconstruction projects and therefore have many construction vehicles adding to the production of emissions within the city. To combat this problem and increase emission reductions, the city adopts this policy which will require all construction vehicles to use ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel) as well as be equipped with the most current EPA approved diesel engine.

Specific Example

Through the passing of Local Law 77, New York City pushed to combat emissions production by requiring that contractors who were working on the Twin Towers meet a minimum emission standard by using emission control devices to reduce pollution effects of the project. There were concerns about how this would be enforced; thus, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) created a web tool called the Clean Diesel Clearing House which helps contractors and people monitoring the health of city air to learn how certain equipment pieces affect the air quality.

Tradeoffs

Tradeoffs.png

Tradeoffs of implementing this policy may include:

  1. Reduction in local construction
  2. Price of replacing engines
  3. Price of investing in new technology
  4. Continued reliance on fossil fuels rather than alternatives
  5. Difficult to enforce
Compatibility Assessment

Compatibility Assessment.png

If answered yes, the following questions indicate superior conditions under which the policy is more likely to be appropriate:

  1. Have harmful air emissions contributed to public health issues?
  2. Does the city or town endure large amounts of construction or congestion?
  3. Do air quality monitors indicate negative results?
  4. Has there been public opinion indicating desire for environmental reforms?
  5. Does smog exist and has it effected weather or water quality of the city or town?
Design

Design.png

Assuming that a jurisdiction has decided to adopt the policy, the following questions will need to be answered when determining how to implement this policy:

  1. What are the main targets of the emission reduction equipment requirements?
    1. Specific targets of the requirements would be large construction sites as well as any non-road motor vehicles such as trucks.
  2. Is the cost of emission reduction equipment worth the benefits?
    1. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 have set out stricter standards for the improvement of air quality. Since the reforms, SO2 emissions have fallen by about 70% and lead has fallen by 99%. This has had significant impacts on human health. Studies predict that by 2020, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments will have saved 4.2 million lives and have saved $2 trillion in economic benefits.


ADOPTION


Adoption.png

PolicyGraphics
Adopters
  • Notable entities who have implemented or adopted this policy include:
  1. Chicago, IL – requires contractors to receive “Green Fleet Score”, made to reduce emissions
  2. Los Angeles, CA – all trucks must have a 2007 model year engine
  3. Oakland, CA – prohibits trucks with 1993 engine or lower. Additionally, those trucks who purchase alternative fueled trucks can receive funding through the Goods Movement Emission Reduction Funding Program.
  4. Seattle, WA – recommends trucks to have 1994 engine or newer.
  5. Port of Houston, TX – encourage trucks to seek eligibility though the Texas Emissions Reduction Program.
[2]


STAKEHOLDERS


Supporters

Supporters.png

  • Advocates – Alternative Energy. Assumption: Reducing fossil fuel emissions opens options to cleaner fuel sources.
  • Advocates – Environmental Protect. Assumption: Decreasing air pollution with increase atmospheric health.
  • Constituent Groups – Local Residents, Student Groups. Assumption: Will appreciate cleaner air quality.
  • Government Agencies – Environmental Protection. Assumption: Decrease air pollution and improve quality of life.


Opponents

Opponents.png

  • Associations – Building and Construction. Assumption: Wouldn’t appreciate restrictions which interfere with or prolong job completion.
  • Advocates – Urbanism. Assumption: More stringent regulations could interfere with urban growth.
  • Constituent Groups – Automobile Clubs and Owners. Assumption: Needing newer emission reduction parts in their car could be costly.
  • Government Agencies – Motor Vehicles. Assumption: Would not support the additional money required to keep up with standards.



REFERENCES


Research

Research.png

.

Resources

Resources.png

  • [Click "edit" to insert].
Footnotes
  1. INSERT a reference.
  2. INSERT a reference
Related Policies

Park-and-ride station construction

Petroleum fuel subsidies

Vehicle emission standards

Vehicle fuel efficiency standards

Vehicle idling restrictions



PolicyAtlas is maintained by volunteer contributors. For instructions on how to join PolicyAtlas, simply create an account and read about how to contribute a policy.

You can also follow @PolicyAtlas and contact us on: Twitter Icon.png Twitter, Facebook Icon.png Facebook, Instagram Icon.png Instagram and Email.